From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: Native code generation and gcc Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2016 13:31:31 -0500 Message-ID: References: <878truxsbg.fsf@fimbulvetr.bsc.es> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1481481117 16648 195.159.176.226 (11 Dec 2016 18:31:57 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2016 18:31:57 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1.50 (gnu/linux) To: guile-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Dec 11 19:31:53 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cG8uf-0003dk-Gp for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 11 Dec 2016 19:31:53 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:56730 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cG8uj-0007e6-HT for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 11 Dec 2016 13:31:57 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:33715) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cG8uY-0007dC-NC for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 11 Dec 2016 13:31:47 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cG8uV-0003KY-LQ for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 11 Dec 2016 13:31:46 -0500 Original-Received: from [195.159.176.226] (port=55572 helo=blaine.gmane.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cG8uV-0003Jh-FJ for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 11 Dec 2016 13:31:43 -0500 Original-Received: from list by blaine.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cG8uN-0000rM-4Q for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 11 Dec 2016 19:31:35 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 14 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org Cancel-Lock: sha1:sFNoYlDvCOToVibfMPSuAM1Oo9s= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 195.159.176.226 X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "guile-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:18787 Archived-At: > The original GOOPS implementation had a somewhat crazy feature that an > application of a generic function to a specific argument list first > resulted in the standard MOP procedure for finding a set of applicable > methods and, second, from this/these generated something called a "cmethod" > (compiled method) which, in turn, was stored in a cache as well as applied > to the list of arguments. Sounds like the traditional implementation of CLOS, so I wouldn't call that "crazy". The reaon is/was that finding the set of applicable methods and combining them into the resulting "cmethod" was expensive, hence the need for a cache. Stefan "who does the same in Emacs's CLOS implementation"